Reflections of a “Racist” Father

So I’ve earned the reputation of being “racist” and the enmity of those dearest to me. Why? Because I dared tell my daughter that I disapprove of her dating black men. Now, for 90% of you out there, this would seem to be a cut-and-dry case. After all, why else would a man tell his daughter such a thing unless he hates blacks?

Let me give some advice to all you young women who suffer from “racist” fathers: try to have a meaningful conversation with your father – but without hysterics. Of course, if you hate your father, don’t bother even trying. If you hate your father, you probably shouldn’t even be reading this. But, if you love your father, and are left wringing your hands due to his “sickness” and puzzling attitudes, then I strongly suggest you meet the beast head on and confront it. Otherwise, your relationship with your father will be wanting. Perhaps your father really is racist and hates black people simply because that’s what he was taught when he was younger. Perhaps he hates black people for other reasons. Either way, if you object to his feelings, it’s time for you to set him straight and show him that people from every walk of life can be worthy of his respect and friendship.

As for me, this pamphlet explains my point of view (though it is very concise). Please read it. Then, if you disagree, by all means, show me the error of my ways.

For you fathers, take my advice: do not wait until your daughter reaches dating age to explain the dynamics of race that you’ve learned here and elsewhere. Start young and repeat often. Your daughter’s life and well being depend on it.

Following are some reasons why I do not want my daughter dating black men:

Ethnic Continuity

Tiger Woods, Barack Obama, Halle Berry, Bob Marley and Mariah Carey. What do they all have in common? They’re black, right? Well… if you want to get technical, they’re mixed race. But, whenever the issue of ethnicity comes up, it’s their black side that is emphasized. How often do we hear Tiger Woods being described as “Asian”? How often do we hear Halle Berry being described as “white”? Did I even mention Malcom X? He wasn’t white… or was he? Of course one could argue that the black parentage is stressed simply because blacks are a minority. I would disagree but, for the purposes of my argument, we can go with that.

It is normal for a person to want his own ethnicity, religion, language and culture to be passed on to his offspring. For most of Human history, and in most places, this was as natural as breathing. In modern times, exceptions were made for immigrants. After all, if you migrate to a new country, you can’t realistically expect your descendants to continue in the ways of their ancestors in the old country. Nevertheless, even in America, Human nature holds out. People need an identity and they typically want that identity to have depth beyond the boundaries of their own persons. Hispanics have a lot of pride in their heritage. They even have organizations promoting the advancement of their people. One such organization is called “The Race” and our newest Supreme Court member, Sonia Sotomayer, is a great supporter of that organization. Federal money helps support “The Race” and it has chapters in many, if not most, institutions of higher learning. We find that Hispanics are proud of their heritage even in Mexico and Puerto Rico. Does this mean something is wrong with them? On the contrary; their feelings are normal. If I were Hispanic, I would want my kids to be Hispanic. If I were black, I’d want my kids to be black. It just so happens that I’m Jewish and, you guessed it, I want my kids to be Jewish. This concern for the future of my flesh and blood is not new. It has been this way since Biblical times. I remember watching “The Last of the Mohicans” and how sad it made me that their tribe was gone forever. The Jewish tribe is worth no less than the Mohicans.

In the modern Western world, people have lost their connection to nature. Advances in medicine, communication and transportation have left nature buried under thick layers of artificiality. Pain killers can fool a body into believing it is healthy when it is not. The Internet can fool people into thinking of each other as neighbors when they are not. Government can trick diverse peoples into believing they are close kin when they are not. True nations and races do have genetic interests and those interests cannot be made to disappear through so much political correctness. Nature will triumph sooner or later and it is healthy and wholesome for a person to be in touch with nature. For more on this concept, read “On Genetic Interests” by Frank Salter.

What would happen if my daughter ended up marrying a white, gentile man and had kids? The kids would not be Jewish but, since being white does not seem to count as an ethnicity worth being proud of (unless you’re a “racist”), my grandkids would likely consider themselves just as much “Jewish” as gentile. They might even rediscover their Jewish side and convert. This is not so unusual; I’ve known many such people. However, should their father be black, this is what they will consider themselves. Yes, they will not forget that their mom was Jewish. It will be an interesting footnote in somebody’s genealogical records some day. Just find the asterisk at the bottom of the page, in fine print. The obvious reality is that black heritage prevails in nearly all cases here in America. The reasons for this are interesting – but not the subject of this paper. Any ethnicity, when mixed with black, will be swallowed up by the black ethnicity. The exceptions occur when there are specific benefits to be had otherwise – such as casino rights that come with Native American heritage.

Some have hoped for the extinction of the Jewish People through “biological assimilation. It would do the species good – the Gentile gene pool would become smarter, and Jews would become nicer, even as they disappeared from the face of the earth” (Earnest Hooten, paraphrased in “Race and Human Evolution” pg. 148).

Why Not Black?

I do not want my descendants to be black. Why not, you ask? Here are some reasons and it should be noted that most of the following traits apply to black men, to one degree or another, regardless of where they are found or where they hail from:

1) A pathological culture that does not value learning, reading, or the other finer things in life that are considered “acting white”. Please note, I am speaking of American blacks and this cultural phenomenon is well known. Many have bemoaned this fact and it is no secret. Even though individual blacks can transcend this cultural handicap, there is a much higher risk for their children and grandchildren than for members of other ethnicities. The pressure, upon young blacks, is enormous. I do not want this to be the lot of my grandchildren.

2) Higher risk for many diseases. Hardly a day goes by when we don’t read about some malady that blacks are at higher risk for. In fact, it is rare to see an article about health that does not point this out. I do not want my descendants to be at higher risk for those diseases. We’ve got enough as it is.

3) A much higher risk for STD’s: I do not want my grandchildren to belong to a society that suffers disproportionately from sexually transmitted disease. Who, in his right mind, would want that for his own people? Given the choice, I’d rather my descendants be white and not have to deal with it.

4) A considerably lower average I.Q. The average I.Q. for white Americans is 100. For black Americans, it is 85. This is not based on one or two isolated studies; it is a well-established fact about which there is no dispute. The dispute has centered on the causes of this disparity. Whatever they may be, I do not want my descendants to be part of a society that is so handicapped. There are all kinds of negative consequences to societies whose average I.Q. is that low. Again, individuals may transcend those consequences, but their children will always be impacted by them. Ideally, each individual should be part of a greater society. Something larger than himself. As it stands, most blacks in America belong to black society. Many of them want it this way. Others perhaps not. Either way, black society is saddled with this major handicap. Given the choice, I’d rather my progeny not be handicapped in this way.

This is a good place to introduce the concept of “regression to the mean”. It turns out that, within various populations, the children of the highly intelligent will likely regress DOWN toward the mean of the population. Likewise the children of the less intelligent will regress UP toward the mean. So, even if my daughter picks out a bright black man, their children will probably be less intelligent than either of them. In other words, the norm, for black Americans, is 85 and there will be a tendency for black children to regress toward that, even if their parents are highly intelligent. Of course, a good upbringing will mitigate this effect to a certain degree – but for how many generations?

The high incidence of STD’s, among blacks, means that it is those who have sexual relations with them are in much greater danger than those who have sexual relations with white men.

Now let’s take a look at infection rates, among blacks vs. whites, for STD’s:

Regarding AIDS, blacks make up about half of known HIV infections in the U.S. – even though they make up only about 12% of the population. About 2% of American blacks are HIV positive. In other words, a black man is about 7.5 times more likely to be HIV positive than a white man.

Would I encourage my daughter to drive without a seatbelt? Seatbelts reduce the risk of highway fatalities by about 50%. In contrast, refraining from sex with blacks will reduce the risk of STD’s (admittedly not always fatal) by 92%. Any father who remains silent in the face of such risk must either hate his own children or be woefully ignorant.

Higher Risk of Domestic Violence

Across all categories (yes, even serial murder) of crime, blacks are far more likely to be perpetrators. Domestic violence is no different. Because of a combination of “no snitch” culture among blacks and political correctness among whites, there is a lack of willingness to talk about domestic violence among blacks. But it appears that domestic violence is about twice as high, among blacks, than among whites:

A white, who marries a black, is much more likely to be murdered by her spouse than those in mono-race marriages.

One study for the period 1979 to 1981 found that white men who married black women were 21.4 times more likely to be killed by their spouses than white men who married white women. A white woman increased her risk of being killed 12.4 times by marrying a black man. Marrying a white did not appreciably change a black person’t risk of being killed by his or her spouse. (Jared Taylor in “White Identity”, pg. 86. Source: James A. Mercy and Linda Saltzman, “Fatal Violence Among Spouses in the United States, 1976-85,” American Journal of Public Health, May, 1989)

It is a fact that self-confidence is a trait that most women find attractive in a man. Due to the frenzied promotion of black men, at every level of society, it is no wonder that they have an abundance of self-confidence. And so more women are attracted to black men for this reason. As more women seek black men, this confidence grows even more and we have a feedback loop. A charmed woman would never suspect that her man is cheating on her, or that he considers his new white girlfriend as merely a trophy or a status symbol. Of course there are many white men who take advantage of women as well but, given the high priority black men give to attaining a white woman and given the frenzied promotion of black men in today’s society, it is to be expected that a black man presents a higher risk for a white woman.

Higher Risk of Divorce/Separation

Statistics are hard to come by but anecdotal evidence seems to indicate a higher rate of divorce for interracial couples. It seems to me that this would be the case for at least one very simple reason: People of different races are attracted to each other, more often than they’ll admit, BECAUSE of race and not despite race. As evidence of this, I offer an observation that you, dear daughter deny. It is obvious to me, and to many other people, that black male/white female couples are far more numerous than white male/black female couples. Likewise we find that white male/ Asian female couples are far more numerous than Asian male/white female couples. If love were, indeed, colorblind, we would find roughly the same proportions of couples described above. Whenever people are attracted to others for what they perceive as superficial reasons, it is to be expected that separation is more likely in their future. The same could be said about women who pursue tall or wealthy men or men who pursue women with certain external attributes.

But there is a more sinister angle to this story. It is not only true that the vast majority of black/white couples involve a black man and a white woman – but it is also true that the media portrays this arrangement in the vast majority of cases. It is unclear if this is art following reality or reality following art. In any case, the black male is being pushed upon the public as if he were some kind of product. It is not difficult to find examples. Unfortunately, people have become so accustomed to this that they can no longer see it. Black males, even as young as toddlers, are depicted next to white females far more often than the other way around. If the reader doubts this, let her keep track for a while. Let her start paying attention each time a mix of races is shown. How often is a black man standing next to a white (or Asian, for that matter) woman? How often is a white (or Asian) man standing next to a black woman? The discrepancy will become obvious if one only pays attention. The next question you will probably ask will be “so what?” The answer is that any time we see something being sold to the public, there is always a motive. If money is not the motive, what then, could it be? If something has intrinsic value, there is no need for a hard sell. If the sales pitch is pervasive, but there is nothing extraordinary about the product, then women are being set up to get a lot less than they bargained for. Black men are being sold to the public, but not for any monetary gain; instead, this is part of a larger plan to transform society as a whole.

A black woman, writing in “Yahoo Answers, put it rather bluntly when she wrote:

From what I’ve seen, it works the same way. You will see SOME black kids that have fathers, but usually MOST don’t. The same goes with biracial kids, SOME will have fathers but MOST don’t. That is a fact… and a risk a lot of women seem to be taking when they sleep with, and mother kids, from these black men.

I have been asked out so many times by black guys but I was taught at a very young age to not date black men. It may seem wierd to you that I’m black and I’ve been taught to not date black men, BUT my mother knows all too well how black men think. And I’ve seen TONS of black AND biracial kids WITHOUT fathers (usually black) and the statistic on finding a black man who is actually willing to take care of their kids is rare. My mother is black, father is white and they have been married for well over 20 years. I would actually like to have a stable relationship like my parents so I will stick to dating white men. White men statistically are better in all aspects than black men.

Black men LOVE sex, Women and cars.. that is it. They don’t love just 1 women, or just 1 car, they want it ALL. And that is the problem that black men face, their not stuck on reality.. they’re stuck on the fantasy these black rappers are pushing in their faces. Media is to blame.. but then again it’s been like this even when popular rap culture was not popular.

I’m beggining to think it’s set in the black man’s DNA to not be relationship material.

You really need to stop giving credit where credit is not due. White women who end up with black men end up as single mothers USUALLY. I’ve seen it all to many times. (Edited for spelling and grammar by JAY).

Patriotism

It is the natural order of things for humans to show loyalty first to their immediate family. Next comes their extended family. Then their clan. Then their race – which is none other than a more extended family. This is because we are hard-wired for the furtherance of our genes. It benefits us if we look out for those who share more of our genes. This is why we find individuals sacrificing their own lives for the sake of their kin. This is the reasoning behind patriotism. A “patriot” is one who loves his country. A “country” really means a “nation”. A nation is a kinship. Jews are a nation and a Jew is a member of this nation regardless of where he lives. Armenians are a nation, as are Han Chinese and Bantu. Nations transcend national boundaries. We are told, over and over, that America is a nation of many races, religions etc. Yet we don’t see Hispanics shedding their ethnicity. We don’t see blacks declaring that their race is not important. On the contrary, they vote according to race – whether in elections or on a jury. Yet, somehow, it is considered wrong for whites to behave as other races. I say that not only is it not wrong, it is a civic duty and it is the true meaning of “patriotism”. The same applies, of course, to Jews. At a certain level, a person who cares nothing for her own race – so little, in fact, that she will give herself to another race – hates an important part of herself. It is fashionable (among whites and most secular Jews) to minimize ethnic associations. This fad will not last long because it goes against nature. Nature will always win.

There was a time, not long ago, when people took their civic duties seriously. They saw themselves, not just as individuals, but also as part of a continuum. In their minds, they owed an obligation to their ancestors to carry on their bloodline, their good name and their honor. This is the natural order of things and continues to be so in most of the world. But now we have “generation me” that is only concerned with self-gratification. Sometimes this comes in the form of charity and good works and sometimes hedonism – but there is rarely a sense of duty to one’s own flesh and blood and one’s ancestors. The irony in this is that, when other ethnic groups (that do have solidarity) rise up and take power, those “me” people will have nobody to stand up for them; they will be utterly alone and helpless. In the end, they will have nobody to care for them in their old age (if they make it that far) and no homeland to call their own.

Diversity

I once posed a question to a leftist online forum: Would the world be less diverse if there were no Jews? I then followed up with the simple observation that, left unchecked intermarriage would destroy the Jewish People. That being the case, wouldn’t it be better for the cause of diversity if Jews married other Jews and had children?

The above question/statement was viewed with outrage. It was met with accusations of bigotry and intolerance. But where are the Sumerians now? Where are the Goths? Where are the Hittites? All those peoples intermarried themselves into oblivion. I don’t know if the world is worse off without them, but I do know that we have less diversity. How anybody can reasonably claim that wanton intermarriage cannot destroy a numerically small people is beyond me. Furthermore, what meaning does ethnic diversity have if ethnic groups do not preserve their distinctiveness? Perhaps those who tout the virtues of diversity are actually enemies of diversity and they only use it as a tool to destroy ethnic distinctions and, they hope, war and strife. I suspect this is actually the case. If so, then let them come out and say, “we are against diversity”. In the end, we cannot know what the hostile elite truly want – but we can know what WE want. As for me, I want diversity. I want to preserve our ethnic distinctiveness so that we Jews can continue to contribute our part in the patchwork of Mankind. I would consider this a worthy goal and a duty to pass on to my children.

The Other Side of the Coin

The endless pursuit of black men, by non-black women, has negative consequences not just for those directly involved. It turns out that (surprise) there is a crisis among black women who would prefer to date/marry their own kind – but cannot find an eligible black man. Here’s a quote from a recent CNN article:

Contrary to popular belief, there is no “hybrid vigor” among Humans except in unusual populations that are extremely inbred. Yes, we find mixed race people who are very attractive and successful, but the odds of children turning out this way are reduced when they are of mixed race.

Like it or not, thanks to the leftist establishment’s extreme obsession with race, we live in a highly racial society. “People of color” are expected to identify with their ethnic group and, almost from cradle to grave, a person must often make choices which group he belongs to. People, when given the opportunity, segregate by race. We see this in school lunchrooms all over the country. Which table will your half black child sit at? The “black table”, where he probably won’t be fully accepted or the “white table”, where he will always carry the stigma of special treatment? Anti-white racism is a serious problem in the black American community. It is likely that the family of your child’s father will not only resent you but they may resent your child. Perhaps you are fearless and carefree when it comes to racism – but what right do you have to subject a child to it? I know you may not be planning on having children but the truth is that nobody knows. I am one of three brothers and I was the only one who was planned – so accidents run in the family. Beware!

“This could be because families in which one of the parents is black likely experience greater prejudice and disapproval from their extended families than do non-black interracial couples, Powell and Cheng wrote. Also, there seem to be greater social challenges faced by couples in which a non-white man is involved with a white woman, they wrote.”

This might be so, but I think there is another reason: mixed white/black children tend to not resemble either of their parents very much. If we ask ourselves what purpose Mother Nature might have in making us look so different, we quickly realize that physical appearance is a good indicator of genetic variation. Identical twins look the same and they have the same D.N.A. A Bantu and a Swede look very different and their D.N.A. is also different enough for a crime lab to distinguish between them based on a small sample. These external indicators served human populations very well during the many millennia before D.N.A. tests. As a matter of fact, a white parent is likely to be more similar, genetically, to a random white than to her own half black child. The parent has a greater genetic interest in contributing to the welfare of another white than to her own mixed child. As for the other mixed-race couples investing more in their children, this is probably because those cases mostly involve Asian immigrants and Asian immigrants tend to invest more in their children overall. Of course humans are not animalistic, instinct-driven automatons; we have free choice and some of us even adopt and give charity to those who are very different than us. Nevertheless, the voice of nature never disappears – and it shows up in statistics. We can never entirely remove ourselves from nature.

Group Rights

As a libertarian, I sometimes find myself having to find a balance between my emphasis on individual rights and community rights that I intuitively know to exist. While living in Israel, I encountered an interesting phenomenon: immodestly dressed women (as defined by the locals) who ventured into Orthodox areas would find themselves spat upon and sometimes have rocks thrown at them. While I don’t condone the use of violence, the locals have every right to voice their displeasure with such conduct. After all, one major reason Orthodox Jews like to live in their own communities is that they are able to raise their children in what they consider to be a “pure” environment. They feel that only they have the right to determine what type of education their children will receive, who their children’s friends will be, and what type of environment they will be exposed to on the street. The only realistic way to control such things is to form their own community. Most of us would be appalled at a group of potty-mouthed, smoking, irresponsible punk rockers entering a remote village in an Amazon rain forest and mingling with the natives. We would see this as some sort of cultural aggression, imperialism and violation – and we would be right. It would not only be insensitive. It would be wrong. The natives have a right to continue their own traditions as they see fit. They have the right of self-determination.

But the governments of Western countries do not see it this way. They believe that an elite group of wealthy individuals (themselves) have the right to bring millions of aliens to the territory they control. Not only that but they believe they have the right to FORCE the native population to mingle with the newcomers. By law, the natives must attend schools with the children of the newcomers (unless they can afford a private school), work with the newcomers, deal with the newcomers in government offices, hear the language of the newcomers whenever they call a government office or large company and see the newcomers’ faces plastered all over their newspapers, magazines, television and billboards. In other words, government has decided that white people, and Jews, do not have freedom of association. By extension, they are forcing the children of whites (inasmuch as their propaganda is successful) to couple with the children of the newcomers. When populations are FORCED together, it is inevitable that miscegenation will follow. When you choose a black man, in a sense, you are acting as a deputy of The State. Your actions are the natural consequence of the greater design that big government has in mind for us. It is not a random, haphazard event at all. You are facilitating, and furthering, the erosion of the group rights of white people and Jews. Many might claim that you are violating the freedom of association of the black community as well.

Choosing a mate may seem to be a strictly personal choice, one that fits into the realm of the individual. As a matter of fact, it is also a community choice. In this case, the community is a serial community. It is composed of the many thousands of individuals who stand to be born, in the future, from such a union. Your choice of a mate has serious consequences for all those people yet to be born. We owe many of the comforts of modern society to ancestors who had our best interests in mind. The least we can do is return the favor by acting likewise toward our descendants.

Some would say that our nation is a nation of immigrants. Quite so, but every single founder of the United States of America was white. It was clearly their intention that this be a white nation based upon the culture and ideals of Europe. While the continent of America was always multiracial, the United States of America was not. Only much later, when “liberalism” gained ground, toward the end of the 19th century, did the concept of a “melting pot” start to catch on. Only in 1965, with the passage of the immigration act, did the fate of whites in America become sealed. Since then, the traditional values of America have become eroded, crime has skyrocketed and America is losing its lead among nations. Ironically, black society has broken down as a direct result of these “social experiments”. While the 1950’s were not an example of a perfect society, at least there was a distinctive culture that was “American”. Now, who is to say what is “American”? The term can mean anything and, therefore, it means nothing.

Should We All be Judged as Individuals?

Yes, my dear daughter. Indeed we should each be judged as individuals. This is one objection I have to affirmative action programs. You do agree with me that those are unjust for the same reason, don’t you? Of course, as an insurance company, I would certainly not hasten to judge a teenage driver. After all, there are, no doubt, safe and responsible teenage drivers. However, I would have to spend a lot of time getting to know each, and every, teenage driver in order to determine his premiums. I just don’t have the time, so I have no choice but to lump them all together and charge them higher premiums. I know that, as a group, they are more dangerous drivers.

When it comes to dating and relationships, people make generalizations all the time. Just examine the personals in your local newspaper or online. People are expected to generalize about age. As a matter of fact, a person who has no preference at all, about age, would be considered abnormal. I am in my 40’s. Why would most 20-year old women reject me outright for a relationship? I am, after all, young at heart. Should I not be judged as an individual? Is there something wrong with those women? Are they “ageists”? Not only do they judge me online, but even in real life I’m certain that once they discern that I’m in my 40’s, they no longer even consider me a prospect. Women judge men all the time based on their height. It’s often the first thing they notice and many, if not most, women generalize about short men. They are expected to specify which height they are looking for in their personal ads. Are such women heightists? I opine that there is good reason why men and women generalize when seeking a mate: such generalizations have served them well in their evolutionary history. Over time, those traits that were considered advantageous morphed into sexual preferences (but probably not while living in “multiracial societies” as we have today). Typically, they still have validity today and it doesn’t take very much imagination to figure out what those advantages might be. Do we really know somebody until we’ve lived with him for a while? Probably not. The high divorce rate (for all groups) should make that obvious. So, in reality, we are dealing with unknowns. Just like the insurance company, we generalize all the time. We judge people based on how they dress, how they talk, how they walk and their gender. All those external attributes help us survive in an uncertain world. Race is no different. White people, leftists included, vote with their feet when it comes to race. They prefer to be among their own and for very good reason. On all counts, whites are safer among other whites. So not only is it not wrong to focus on white men, it is the most prudent thing to do.

You have asked me, dear daughter, about the hypothetical scenario where you meet a man who is perfect in every way. He is intelligent, handsome, caring, has a profession and is committed. But he happens to be black. You asked if I would still object. The answer is “yes”. By now, if you’ve read this treatise carefully, you would know why. Nevertheless, I shall enumerate the reasons here:

1) You may think you know him, but you really don’t until you’ve lived with him for a while. By then, the damage may already have been done.

2) Even today, when you marry somebody, you are not marrying just the man. You are also, in a sense, marrying his family, his friends and his life history. So you found a black man who bucked the trends. That’s wonderful. Did his brothers, cousins and uncles, who come to visit sometimes, also buck the trends? Did his friends also buck the trends? Will your mixed children buck the trends? Will his (as of yet unknown) criminal history, child support obligations, or health problems become your burden as well?

3) In our increasingly racially conscious, and racially divisive, world, how will you fare? Where will your children stand in the new balkanized U.S.A.? Will they become victims of the spreading black/brown war as Hispanics gain more and more control?

4) You are still young. How well do you know yourself? Many young white women are self-delusional when it comes to interracial relationships. They believe they are color-blind and that their decision is based solely on love. I do not think this is likely given the intense racial propaganda all of us are exposed to. Years of subliminal messages have probably had an impact on your psyche. How could they have not? Perhaps, years later, you will look back and ask yourself, “How could I have fallen for that?” If, indeed, you are marrying him for the wrong reasons, what does this bode for your long-term relationship?

5) Regardless what you’ve been taught by the powers that be, there are fundamental differences between the races. Decades of intense, pervasive and subliminal propaganda have conditioned American blacks to the point where very few can transcend race. For example, there are so few blacks who oppose Obama that they are statistically negligible. The handful who do oppose him are ostracized. Media policies of emphasizing black history, culture, persecution, poverty, discrimination, health issues, music, sports etc. have, in a sense, engendered a powerful feeling of “us” versus “Them” among American blacks who, by and large, see everything through the filter of race. This is how they’ve been trained by the leftist powers that be. So much so that even intelligent, respectful blacks, whose external culture seems no different than that of whites, are still enslaved by a set of attitudes that are supposed to represent “black” attitudes. Witness the reactions after the O.J. Simpson verdict. During, and after, the Obama campaign, and each time an “unarmed black man” gets shot by police. Sure, many whites will agree with those attitudes – but they don’t agree with them 99% of the time. Whites are not enslaved by race because, as far as the leftist elite is concerned, there is no “white community”, there are no “white interests”, there is no “white nation”, there are no “white accomplishments” and there should be no “white pride”. Therefore, a white person is not beholden to any set of racial attitudes. Whites do not vote as a block and do not see things in terms of their race – except in a negative sense (white guilt). In light of the above, any time a white person is coupled with a black person, sooner or later there will be conflict revolving around race. The white may, or may not, agree with the black on any given issue but the former is a free-thinker (at least in regards to racial matters) while the later is certainly not. If you meet a random black person on the street, you can safely assume that he supports Obama, that he supports affirmative action programs, that he believes there is nothing wrong with having a Congressional Black Caucus, that he believes that blacks invented many important things and that anti-black racism is still prevalent in America. On the other hand, you can also safely assume that this black person does not participate in Green Peace protests, is not a member of PETA, does not donate to charities that benefit mainly non-blacks, and did not adopt a white or Asian child.

The Source of the Problem: “Liberalism”

Concepts that are considered dangerous, and outside the scope of debate, can be called “heresy”. Having spent a good portion of my life within religious circles, I have experienced, first hand, how people of faith protect their ideological turf by proscribing certain thoughts. Once those thoughts are forbidden, it becomes less likely that those under their sway will question the underlying basis of their faith. “Liberalism” is very much like a religion in this respect. A “liberal” is guided by emotion and has little tolerance for objective observation if it might challenge one of his core beliefs. He cherishes his faith and will go to great lengths to protect it. Of course not all “liberals” have exactly the same core beliefs. Just as other religions have denominations and sects, so too do “liberals”. The main difference being that “liberals” do not formally recognize these divisions in their ranks.

One common tenet of “liberalism” is racial egalitarianism: the belief that either race does not exist or, even if it does, there are no meaningful distinctions between the races. Within the framework of organized higher education, media and government, science is subservient to dogma. Research that focuses on racial differences will not be funded. If it occurs anyway, it will not be published. If it gets published anyway, it will be ignored. If it gets attention anyway, it will be condemned.

Scientists who question racial dogma are marginalized and persecuted. Then, when a layman expresses doubt about racial dogma, he will be told that the vast majority of scientists uphold the belief that race is not a meaningful concept. Of course the reason this is so is that most scientists a) have been indoctrinated just like the rest of us and b) value their careers. In many countries, a scientist can even be prosecuted under the law, for questioning this orthodoxy. You cannot question core beliefs of Islam and expect a rational response from a Muslim. Similarly, you cannot question core beliefs of racial orthodoxy and expect a rational response from a “liberal”. Instead, he will fling accusations and insults. You might point to mounds of evidence backing up what you say, but the “liberal” will not read it because he finds it offensive. This is to say, he approaches the subject emotionally.

The mind of a liberal has been conditioned to assume certain things about race and science:

1) He who entertains notions of meaningful racial differences hates “people of color”.

2) He who believes there are differences, in average I.Q. between the races, considers whites to be more human than other races because I.Q. is what makes us human more than anything else.

3) He holds the bell curve to be an invalid concept because he knows people on the right side of the bell curve. In other words, he does not grasp the concept of “mean I.Q.” or “average”. If you say that blacks have a lower average I.Q. than whites, in his mind this means that every black is stupid – which is patently false and, therefore, you are wrong.

4) He assumes that there must be ulterior, evil, motives in your racial research and opinions. Research that is acceptable to “liberals” is good because it furthers science but research that challenges racial dogma is bad because it is motivated by hate.

5) He fears that any kind of racial science will, ultimately, lead to another Nazi holocaust, Jim Crow laws or slavery.

6) He assumes that, since you don’t want your daughter dating a man of another race, this means you hate members of the other race. The “liberal” has no conception of racial awareness for whites except in the context of hatred for other whites. This is why he cannot fathom why any white, or Jew, would wish to carry his ethnic group into the future unless it is because the person in question wants other races to disappear.

7) He believes that it is acceptable for “people of color” to have their own organizations to further their own race – but it is not acceptable for whites to do the same. The “liberal” will claim that this is because “people of color” are minorities and persecuted. Yet he will deny whites this right even in place like South Africa or Detroit.

9) He ignores injustices that are not politically correct such as the plight of the pygmies, black on white crime, rape among blacks, gay on straight rape and the high rate of drunk driving among illegal immigrants. Similar injustices, when perpetrated by whites, get a lot of attention and scrutiny.

10) He will avoid reading race-realist literature, claiming that he is “too busy” or has “other priorities” and yet he considers himself well informed and his opinions “factual”.

11) He believes that discrimination is wrong, even within a privately owned company. In other words, a “liberal” has only a rudimentary concept of private property.

12) He believes that affirmative action programs have only beneficiaries, but no victims.

13) He believes that a society can create laws “encouraging” the promotion of one group over another but, somehow, this will not lead to sacrifices being made in order to advance the favored group and no qualifications will be compromised in this process.

14) He believes that primitive peoples have “complex” societies that require much intelligence and wisdom – wanton murder and rape, within those societies, is hardly worthy of mention.

15) He considers “white privilege” to be pervasive and can account for the multitude of whites in high positions of authority. Yet “black privilege” has nothing to do with the multitude of blacks in sports.

16) He believes that if the mainstream media does not report something (such as black on white murder and rape), it is not an important issue. It only becomes an important issue when major news outlets report it or it affects the “liberal” personally.

17) He believes that “race” is synonymous with “skin color”. Therefore, since skin color cannot determine I.Q., neither can race.

18) He believes that I.Q. tests are culturally biased in favor of white people.

19) He considers whites to be apart from nature insofar as they are not expected to have an interest in the advancement of their own genetic kin. In contrast, it is normal and acceptable for animals and other races to be a part of nature in this way.

The above is only a partial list. Against such assumptions, it is easy to understand why educating a “liberal” is an uphill struggle. Much has been written, by people far more educated than myself, to dispel the above “liberal” racial myths.

There are so many barriers that it typically takes decades to overcome them. This is a major reason why the race-realist/conservative population is older: it takes most of one’s life to be cured of “liberalism”. Indeed, it sometimes ends up costing the “liberal” his life or the lives of his loved ones. It is unfortunate that, at least for women, our childbearing years end before we are cured of “liberalism”.

There is another great obstacle to learning the truth about race: Academic laziness. People tend to follow the easiest path. They would rather be entertained than challenge their minds. Therefore, I can understand why you, my daughter, spend so much of your sparse free time, reading novels, watching movies and text messaging your friends. It would take a lot of effort to break your inertia and dedicate some of your time to studying the implications of human biodiversity. Moreover, you live in an area that has a large white majority; you are not subject to the negative aspects of ethnic diversity on any meaningful scale. Therefore, from your perspective, there seems to be no urgency. However, thanks to disparate birth rates and misguided immigration policies, whites are destined to be a minority in the U.S. in the very near future. Since your experience with black/Hispanic society has been somewhat limited, you see no cause for concern. Your assumption is that blacks and Hispanics behave the same way, when they are a majority, as when they are a small minority. I would recommend that you move to Detroit or inner L.A. for a few months to educate yourself – but I value your safety. One common misconception, fed by the movie industry and constant propaganda, is that poor white areas are as crime-ridden and dangerous as poor black/Hispanic areas. By far the best determiner, for crime rates in a specific area, is the racial makeup of its inhabitants. While poverty can exacerbate crime levels, it does not cause it. Poverty and crime are often found together because both are products of low I.Q. and a high time preference (living for the now rather than planning for the future). A higher violent crime rate, amongst blacks, is also a result of higher testosterone levels – which is also suspected of contributing to a higher prostate cancer rate.

The Thick Book Tactic

Back in the days when I was part of the religious Jewish community, I took note of a common tactic to defend accepted dogma. I call it “The Thick Book Tactic”. The way it works is that a famous person, regarded as a scholar, writes a long book supposedly disproving the targeted heresy. Back in those days, I had my own “heresy” and I actually went through the trouble of reading the “thick books”. I discovered that they were practically devoid of real content, instead referring to other works – which, in turn, were easy to debunk. Those “thick books”, when actually read, were card houses. But the truth is that they were never intended to be read, at least not by the general populous. Instead, the main intention was to give people something to point to and say, “Do you see this thick book? It debunks your heresy. People wiser than you have already resolved your issues”. Of course, when I wrote my own opinions, well founded as they were, few were interested in reading them because I was not famous. The masses would much rather point to nonsense written by a famous person, than actually consider an opposing view. They’re comfortable in their faith and those “thick books”, even if never read, help support their ideology.

Today, “liberals” have their own “thick books” that they use to defend their racial orthodoxy. Very few actually read them of course. Those thick books would intimidate the vast majority of those who would question racial orthodoxy because they are so thick. Not only that, but they use technical terminology and refer to other works that few laymen have even heard of.

Conclusion

As mentioned above, one of the tenets of “liberal” faith is that primitive societies are “complex” and “wise”. So let us learn something from them: respect your elders and learn from them. Life is too short to learn it all by yourself; you might be too old to reap the benefits of wisdom by the time you have gained it. For most of human history, our life expectancy was about 40. Since the average person would be dead by the time his life experiences had accumulated enough to guide him meaningfully, it was crucial to learn from his elders. Societies that did not respect their elders were doomed to fail. Then came the invention of writing – but still, most people couldn’t read. And so even then, elders were a valuable asset to their communities. Now, we live in the modern Western world where most of us are literate – and yet most people will only read establishment-supported literature if anything at all. They seem to believe that, since information is all around them, somehow it will seep into their head by osmosis and without any effort on their part. They simply assume that their leaders will automatically filter out the false from the true. They assume that the news media will be honest and upfront with them, reporting fairly and impartially. In fact, they are being deliberately misled by both their leaders and the media. They are being lied to over and over again. YOU are being lied to by those you trust and now I, your father, am trying to warn you. You owe it to yourself to spend time investigating these matters without bias. When your eyes are opened, you will find it hard to understand how you could have been so blind before.

In scripture it is assumed that both parents must be Jewish or, at least, the father. Much later, the rabbis decreed that it is the mother’s side that determines whether a child is Jewish. Nevertheless, this is after the fact and it does not mean that it is alright for Jewish women to date/marry gentile men.

Also, in the long run, such intermarriage will lead to many “technical Jews” who have no clue that they are even Jewish. Let’s say your mother’s mother’s mother’s mother was Jewish but nobody else in your ancestry. This is a clear indication that your family does not consider itself Jewish. If they did, they would have married other Jews. Instead, they married members of some other ethnicity and would consider themselves members of that group. So, from a practical standpoint, they have no connection to the Jewish people. The fact that, according to rabbinical law, you would be “Jewish” has no real meaning at that point.

Also, I don’t think it would be in the interests of the Jewish people to embrace large numbers of “technical Jews” whose Jewishness is only by virtue of some distant female ancestor. Many Jews would disagree with me on this (see “Jewish pedigree and racial origins”) but such a policy would lead to us being like some “Indian” tribes where only one sixteenth Indian blood is sufficient to belong to the club. It would eliminate any ethnic component to being Jewish and reduce it to a meaningless label.

I ask it from the other direction: Who is Jewish for you? At least 25%, 50%, 75%, only mother, only father, both mother and father? Or just someone who considers himself/herself as Jewish? Someone brought up by Jewish culture?

Great question! Hundreds of years of diaspora have diluted the Jewish people to a certain extent. But this should not serve as an excuse to dilute it even more. I doubt there are any “pure Jews” and there is no way of knowing if a particular individual Jew is 25%, 50% or 75% Jewish by ancestry. All we can do is take the genetic legacy we have inherited from our forefathers and try to preserve it as best we can.

But this is not just a genetic matter. Inevitably, along with genetic impurities also come cultural and religious impurities. They go hand in hand. Let’s again use the example of native Americans. Suppose we have a tribe of several thousand individuals. If a handful of them marry out and raise their mixed children as members of the tribe, the tribe can probably still survive. But, if this practice becomes widespread, it would pose a danger to the existence of the tribe; it would remain the same tribe in name only. Eventually, members of that tribe would become indistinguishable from the wider population and they would be extinct. Any specific percentage, of native blood, that one might require to be considered a member of that tribe would be arbitrary.

So, to answer your question. I do consider sincere converts to Judaism to be Jewish (in the religious sense). I also would consider somebody whose only Jewish ancestor was her great grandmother – but she considers herself “Jewish” – to be Jewish. It is not in my power to grant, or deny, membership in our tribe, but it is in my power to state my opinions as to the general welfare of my people.

Very well put. I am an Iupper class Indian. I can totally see the angle of reality that you come from.

I will be blunt but brutally honest – will say what some have in their minds but won’t say it.

1. Any one(I mean any one), from any race marrying a black man will result in an automatic doun-grade for that woman and some upgrade for the off spring(considering a complete black-black offspring).
2. In the name of political correctness, some useful research has been blocked. But you cannot keep these a secret for ever.
3. Unfortunately, the liberals have been the biggest enemies of blacks – legitimizing every thing that blacks do.
4. One needs to look no where else than south africa for a proof.

Published 10 February, 2010, 03:23
Edited 16 March, 2010, 23:19
Thirty-four-year-old Kandy Phillips knows what she wants in a relationship, but she’s still missing a key ingredient – a good man.

“I don’t have diseases,” Phillips said. “I don’t have an attitude problem, I don’t like to fight.”
What Phillips does have is her own house and a good job.
Shavon Conyers, 28, is in the same boat – with a full time job as a mental health counselor. In her spare time, she is working on her master’s degree.
“A lot of guys – they’re just not on my level,” Conyers said. “We don’t share the same interests, or they’re weird.”
Both Conyers and Phillips say they’re open-minded. However , the men they’re looking for have one important trait: They have to be black.

“My dad is a big strong dark skinned black man,” Phillips said. “I’ve felt embarrassed that I can’t bring a guy home that looks like him.”
Conyers said she would consider dating outside her race, but her family, particularly her grandmother would “hit the floor” if she brought a man home who wasn’t black.
Phillips and Conyers aren’t unique. In America, more than 44 percent of black women have never been married. That’s compared to 32 percent of Hispanic women and 23 percent of white women, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Black men also make up a high percentage of the prison population, and are much more willing to date outside their race.
Many estimate that about 80 percent of black-white mixed race couples are made up of a black man and a white woman. Until some of these things change, the search for love, particularly for black women, will remain a difficult one.”

The implication is that there is nothing wrong with her grandmother “hitting the floor” if she brought home a non-black boyfriend. None of the comments there accuse her grandmother of racism either. Whites/Jews deserve what blacks take for granted: the right to expect racial continuity from one’s children.

Read it. The woman writes like a child. Spouts every imbecilic racial cliche known to man, provides no backing, and apparently is unaware of the writing device known as “paragraphs” (tho perhaps that is the fault of Essence‘s editor, which is just as shameful). Pathetic.

Ask any woman about the odds of birth defects for their unborn children. With pretty much every disease the doctors are concerned with, the odds are greater that a child born of two causasians will have it.

Have you ever seen a black kid with Down’s Syndrome?

Look up who has the greatest chance of producing a kid with Cystic Fibrosis.

For argument’s sake, let’s assume you are correct about the odds of disease among whites. I’m curious. Why do you think it is so that white babies are more likely to have diseases? Are you implying that there is validity to the concept of race?

I loved this article. Like you, I have told my children they are not to ever bring home a black, but since they are already racially aware (and not due to my influence!), I don’t think I need worry about that.

When I was growing up (early 1960’s), I never saw a mixed couple. I don’t think I saw one until somewhere around 1975 or so. One thing I did learn, however: any White girl who would go with a negro was the lowest of the low. Absolute trash and filth. In reality it is still that way, but Whites (and Blacks) keep it in more, if you know what I mean.

When I was single, I would not have even dated a man who had ever been with a black woman…because to me, just being willing to date a non-White says a lot about the person’s character, and none of it is good.

[…] have already made clear my position regarding crimes against society (in my treatise “Reflections of a Racist Father“. even so, I do not believe that miscegenation should be illegal; it should be condemned on […]

I would be curious if they could come up with any meaningful counter-argument.

I could think of one: that part of your reasoning is due to unjust discrimination against blacks. If you reject a very able (mixed) black man like president Obama as a potential husband.
Of course, you can reply that a) it is not your daughter’s due to endure discrimination for the sake of helping a black cause and more importantly
b)some aspects of discrimination are just true: the black anti-intellectual culture, and the fact that lots of relatives would be “normal” problem blacks

I plan to mention this in my blog, or maybe you post a link to this in the replies to my race discussion article(s)

Of course, this is exactly an example of discrimination, even I tried to avoid such topics.

Do you know statistics, regression towards the mean? It teaches you that you should pick the white person, when faced with 2 equally qualified candidates with equal test scores. Because the black guy with good test scores is more standard deviations away from the mean, and thus expected to score worse in the next test.

Regarding regression to the mean, Rushton writes about it at length in his book “Race, Evolution and Behavior”. I’ll try to find the relevant parts and send them to you in the near future. Regression to the mean refers to children and grandchildren; it is not applicable to any one individual.

[…] cannot survive, in any meaningful way, if we interbreed freely with blacks (with any non-Jews, but especially blacks), so too will interbreeding with blacks accelerate the demise of the Cherokee people. Black […]

[…] survive, in any suggestive way, if we interbreed openly with blacks (with any non-Jews, though especially blacks), so too will interbreeding with blacks accelerate a passing of a Cherokee people. Black […]

Ignorance is also bliss, even though you spent a whole post spewing racial sentiments against blacks like my self, I only hope you obtain a higher education and gather facts not hasty generalizations from inaccurate stereotypes. Why don’t you speak about the Holocaust, and the living conditions your ancestors lived in because you were just as much of a victim as we were to enslavement dummy! Speak on what you know , your own history of concentration camps under the rule of Hitler. Oh, and for the IQ text results that really don’t say nothing about intelligence because, for one, we didn’t construct them to cater our own abilities, that’s why there’s a disparity. Secondly, if you were really studying history as early as the 1800’s you probably would have acknowledge books were kept from us during slavery, and that we were not able to vote, what was the Jews excuse? Plus, look at the resilience in blacks, we are faced with all this discrimination under institutionalized ignorance, but somehow we still happened to prevail this far without hating nobody.
PS: The more you tell your daughter how wrong something is OFF HATRED ALONE , will only make it that much more tempting FOR HER to test that taboo, and get some of this BEAUTIFUL BLACK RACE!

Obviously you haven’t read much of this blog. I have allowed only this one, of your comments, to be posted while trashing the rest. If you’d write a post detailing how today’s I.Q. tests are “not constructed to cater to your own abilities” I would gladly publish it.

You’re right. I was not studying history as early as the 1800’s – since I wasn’t even alive then.

Books were kept from slaves? Seems like a good reason for blacks to read lots of books today. You should encourage them to do so rather than wasting your time on “racist” blogs like this one.

Black have prevailed? How? By having kids? Tell me how a race, such as blacks, would exist if they had NOT prevailed. What do you mean by “prevailed”? It is not clear.

Blacks don’t hate anybody? Blacks are, on the whole, among the most racist people on Earth. How else do you explain the vast amount of violence perpetrated by blacks upon others? Why don’t you address the issue of black on white rape instead of worrying about some words on a blog like this one?

is NOT an intellectual. Plus WHAT, by the way…TWO? Give us a break, broheim. It’s like that idiot, Michael Eric Dyson, calling himself “the hip-hop intellectual”. What a blow hard! He be down wif da people, ‘n’ $hit!

[…] Zek Evets, or one of his followers, posted a link to a race-denialist version of my treatise “Reflections of a ‘Racist’ Father” as a comment to my last post. Following the link brought me to Evets’ blog and to […]

Brilliant essay with so many good points. I emailed it to a few “liberals” I know, one of them an otherwise very smart and sensible blonde blue-eyed Texan girl who lives in Cape Town with a black/coloured Rastafarian – seemingly a very polite and respectful man….but what will her children (assuming they have any) become?

I dont envy your dilemma which is one that even race-realists would baulk at having to make. Unfortunately our governments demented policies of enforced “cultural enrichment” virtually forces this dilemma upon responsible parents. This only goes to prove that “diversity” is cultural suicide and racial segregation is the only sustainable option for the survival of civilisation.

Jew AY, This was such a fantastic, well-put and succinct article. Thanks a lot – I am tagging it onto my favorites so I can just scroll to it, print it out, and hand it to anyone as an answer to their liberal outrage when I DARE to speak on behalf of YT!!

[…] have rights. This is a point that I myself expounded upon in the first post of this blog, Reflections of a “Racist” Father. We take the view that human society includes not only those who are alive today, but also those […]

The essay is a good summation of race realism. But it seems to go on a little too long, and goes off on tangents not really related to the subject at hand (i.e., the digressions on liberal orthodoxy). The points about dating black men were really made under the section “Why Not Black?”

There’s another point to be considered: if America is really as “racist” as the critics claim it to be, then wouldn’t having a child who would be considered to be black (even if 50% white) put that child at a disadvantage? The child would have to face “institutionalized racism” and all that white-on-black violence that the media tells us is out there?

It would be interesting to see a rational debate on this topic, with intelligent responses to each of the points made. Alas, such rational debate does not seem possible these decadent days.

I did want to ask INTELLECTUAL BLACK MAN (IQ-100+) some questions. And I mean this seriously. We are supposed to be having a dialog on race.

Ignorance is also bliss, even though you spent a whole post spewing racial sentiments against blacks like my self, I only hope you obtain a higher education and gather facts not hasty generalizations from inaccurate stereotypes.

Which statements in the essay are incorrect? e.g., the stats on median IQ? violent crime rates? illegitimacy rates? If the stats cited are incorrect, then let us see you state the correct ones.

Oh, and for the IQ text [test?] results that really don’t say nothing about intelligence because, for one, we didn’t construct them to cater our own abilities, that’s why there’s a disparity.

I’ll put aside any comment here about double negatives. I will ask:
* Are there IQ tests which show intelligence in other ways?
* Can you give us the URL for an IQ test which would cater to blacks?
* Why do the “racist” IQ tests which place blacks at the bottom of the bell also curve place East Asians and Jews at the top?
* Why are there high rates of blacks dropping out of college, and low rates of blacks in STEM courses? If IQ tests are meaningless, then we would see these rates varying little from the white.
* Putting academia aside, what is there to indicate collective black intelligence: look at cities such as Detroit, or most countries of sub-Saharan Africa. Why are black-run polities marked by dysfunctions such as high rates of crime, corruption, economic decline, infrastructure collapse, racial violence against non-blacks, etc?

Secondly, if you were really studying history as early as the 1800′s you probably would have acknowledge books were kept from us during slavery, and that we were not able to vote, what was the Jews excuse?

First of all, many Americans came from European and Asian countries which had high rates of illiteracy. This did not stop them from learning and achieving.

Second, blacks in sub-Saharan Africa did not develop literacy nor manufacture books. Consequently, any books you would have access to are a product of other civilizations.

Third, there is nothing today to keep black people today from books, nor gaining access to all the knowledge in the world via the Internet. And we have seen every manner of social engineering project, from Brown vs Board of Education through forced busing to discount laptop computers for the black community to expand black education and let us not forget Jesse Jackson’s PUSH. Why has this failed to produce the expected IQ boost?

Plus, look at the resilience in blacks, we are faced with all this discrimination under institutionalized ignorance, but somehow we still happened to prevail this far without hating nobody.

Can you name a single law today which discriminates against blacks? In point of fact, the system discriminates in favor of you: affirmative action, minority grants, blacks studies, MLK holidays, the media covering up high rates of black violent crime, mandatory “diversity” indoctrination in the schools and workplace, hatecrime laws, importation of Somali refugees, etc.

The point is, the system is rigged entirely in your favor. And yet you still can not produce the desired results. This is where race realism comes in, because it looks at genetic factors in things such as IQ for an explanation.

Now, it may be that race realism is not correct, but so far I have yet to see rational counter-argument to the points being made in the essay. Instead, we got an emotional response with the usual laundry list of excuses.

PS: The more you tell your daughter how wrong something is OFF HATRED ALONE ,

The essay makes statements and then backs them up with data. If the statements or data are wrong, then please in the interests of a dialog on race demonstrate to us where this is so. For example, do you have alternative stats on violent crime commission by race? Is it not correct that the black illegitimacy rate is 70+% (circa three times the white rate)? If these stats are wrong, then show us the correct ones.

But you can’t post facts, so you have to claim this is about “hatred.” You are telling all that you have no argument. Like most ideologues, when faced with unpleasant realities you have to shout down the opposition.

But maybe I am wrong.

The ball is in your court. Let’s see you put together rational counter-arguments. Perhaps JAY would be kind enough to allow this dialog to continue.

[…] Why the West Rules, by Ian Morris, belongs to a genre of books that race-denialists like to claim as evidence that race-realists are mistaken and ignorant. These books, though read by few, are important to the race-denialist ideology; they form the basis of its “Thick-book tactic,” which I wrote about in my very first post: […]